About your Search

20130318
20130326
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25 (some duplicates have been removed)
wrong, and it waw not only wrong during the bush administration, it was wrong during the clinton administration. if you look at theti intele the very end of president bill clt's administration, they were talking also about saddam building up his w.m.d.s. >> rose: what was the error ofwa intelligence? why did they believe that? >> it was a tbawrl off imagination-- it was a failure of imagination. i was writing about the intelligence at the time and i myself thought some of it might have been valid when i was writing about it. really what happened is saddam cooperated with a letter of the united nations demands. he let inspectors go here and there, but he never cooperated with the spirit of it. and he was trying to maintain ambiguity over what he actually had. because he was concerned, first and foremost biran, which doesan have w.m.d., and he was trying to repress his own population. he had used poison gas against the kurds. he didn't want internal factions to know he didn't have it. he maintained a big of ambiguity about it. and even hans blinx wrote he thought he must be having
not do it from the outside. george bush tried unsuccessfully. every president has tried and all failed because of the participants. >> what has changed? the settlements continue, but it is no longer number one on president obama's agenda. >> the president has acknowledged the mistake early on, but let's be frank, the relationship has changed. netanyahu embraced, endorsed and basically campaigned for mitt romney, who did not carry florida, which was supposed to be the cornerstone of the campaign strategy. barack obama did get reelected and made a case that the two- state solution was imperative for israel's values, that we do not have people that will be stopped at every checkpoint and cannot move freely in their homeland. making an appeal to jewish values and traditions. i thought it was great. >> it is pushing on an open door. the israelis have offered peace. they offered peace in 1967, at camp david in 2000 and in 2008. the point is not the settlemen s , and that is the reason it is important what obama said. he essentially said it is not the settlements, but that the palestinians ha
were lost today. more on where iraq stance 10 years on, i spoke a short time ago with president bush's envoy to iraq directly following the 2003 invasion. thanks very much for coming in. how will history look back on this war? >> it is, in a way, too early to ask. obviously, in 10 years, everybody says we need to have the answer, but i do not think we have it yet because it is a mixed record. there is good stuff and bad news. you have to find a balance, and it will take awhile. >> what could america have done to make it less of a mixed record and more of a good record? >> i have said all along that the transition from dictatorship to democracy is hard. it takes time, and the key factor is security. we did not provide adequate security really until bush ordered the surge in 2007. when you do not have security in the post-conflict situation, you are going to have a real problem. you have simply got to provide security, and we did not do it at the outset, and i think that had an impact on everybody. >> you are in a position where i think you were called the vice whatever at -- sardonica
george w. bush. he won in 2004. it came down to ohio which had a gay marriage ban on the ballot. the day after the election, senator dianne feinstein said it was too much. people were not ready for it. >> i get it. i get it. now with that, the dust settled and they did as they do with the exit polls. they analyze. there were ten issues. social issues was number five behind other issues. interestingly, it broke both ways. enthusiastic for bush and enthusiastic for kerry. >> scott: fast forward to 2007 and 2008. senator barack obama runs for president and comes to san francisco to raise money. word was he did not want to be photographed with you. was that true? >> willie brown and myself were doing the fund-raisers for him. one at a restaurant. he had strong opinions. a lot of folks had strong opinions. >> scott: was he worried? >> everyone was worried. i had that brief moment where the new person and the rising star and i was going to go to boston during the convention and speak. all of a sudden, calling up and i said i get it. all these folks that were surrounding me, moved aside and to
. former florida governor jeb bush used last week's conservative political action conference to foreshadow many of the conclusions contained in today's report. >> we must move beyond the divisive and extraneous issues that currently define the public debate. never again, never again can the republican party simply ride off... write off entire segments of our society because we assume our principles have limited appeal. they have broad appeal. >> ifill: but senator marco rubio told the conservative meeting that the party should not embrace change for its own sake. >> and so our challenge is to create an agenda applying our principles. our principles, they still work. applying our time-tested principles to the challenges of today. >> ifill: yet the biggest hit at last week's conference hailed from outside the national party mainstream. they included kentucky senator rand paul, south carolina governor nicky haley and 2008 vice presidential nominee sarah palin. joining joining us now to talk about how deep the party's fissures go are susan page, washington bureau chief for "u.s.a. today." and
in may of 2003 when president george w. bush announced the end of major combat operations in iraq while aboard the u.s.s. "abraham lincoln." >> in the battle of iraq, the united states and our allies have prevailed. >> reporter: but it would be more than eight years before the last u.s. military convoys rolled out of iraq. >> i'm happy! i'm happy to be out of iraq. >> reporter: nearly 4,500 americans were killed during the war that spanned close to nine years. along with more than 100,000 iraqis. some of the conflicts' bloodiest battles were fought in fallujah when u.s. forces faced off against insurgents and four u.s. contractors were attacked. their charred bodies were dragged through the streets. in december, 2003, saddam hussein was captured by u.s. troops who found him hiding in an underground hole. he would be tried by an iraqi tribunal and found guilty of crimes against humanity and was executed in december, 2006. was what wasn't found in iraq were active weapons of mass destructions or w.m.d.s, something many in the bush administration had stated saddam hussein had at his dispos
has had in the history of the u.s./israeli relations. it goes beyond begin and carter and bush 41 and the reality is that no american president for political reasons and policy reasons can afford to have this sort of relationship. a lot of it rests on netanyahu and his first incarnation. even clinton, a guy who was prepared to cut him all kinds of breaks was annoyed in extreme us with some of netanyahu's frustrating behavior. but the reality is that barack obama has to clear away this old business, this dysfunctional relationship and he has to deal with two basic realities. he does not want to be the american president on whose watch the two-state solution expires and he certainly doesn't want to be the american president on whose watch iran acquire it is xas capacity or everybody a nuclear weapon. so israel is central to both of those stories. he's going early, there's no expectations and he's going early with a view i suspect to seeing whether or not he can't manage that relationship with netanyahu more effectively and create a new relationship with an israeli public who's deepl
to the cairo speech, which was a speech to the arab and muslim world, the belief that bush had ruined america's reputation in the arab and muslim world. and that he needed to fix that. after all, we had 150,000 troops deployed in afghanistan and iraq. he was about to send more. we needed to improve our relations with the arabs and the muslims. and if we could achieve that, i think he felt that would redound to the benefit of israel because then the arabs would be prepared to engage with israel in response to our influence on them, and israel would then respond. that was essentially, as i understand, his theory of the case. and so essentially the message that he was playing to the arab world was i care about you. i understand your concerns. and-- . >> rose: the image of america is no longer the image i want you to have of america. >> correct. and by the way, i understand the palestinian issue is your hot-button issue and i'm going to solve it. he promised them that he would close cuan bega began-- guantanamo and solve the palestinian problem. but the message that he sent to israel at the same
-- ms. -- nmumiss. it was not a significant factor. were not able mi6 to convince bush of the validity of their intelligence from their two most highly placed sources. if they had been able to do so, britain and america might not have gone to war. by this time, the guy had probably been cast -- the die had probably been cast. >> the probably that -- body that probably feels most miserable of all -- >> he have every reason to think that -- they have every reason to think that. >> the legacy of the intelligence failures over iraq is with us still. peter taylor, bbc news. for people still living in iraq 10 years later, the preoccupation is not with intelligence failures of the past but with security failures of the present. how does the country stand today? a short time ago, i spoke to the bbc's ben brown in baghdad. the only news we get of iraq in america is when there is a car bomb exploding. it's another indication there is some violence. how secure is the country? >> there are still car bombs and suicide bombs, but the violence is not as bad as it was. if you drive around baghdad, the
... looking... looking... do you see red tomatoes? (he gasps.) look! these bushes have tomatoes! i think. but... they're so little. - are they tomatoes? - uh-huh. those are cherry tomatoes. - i never had a cherry tomato before! hi, little cute cherry tomato! - daniel, why don't you and miss elaina pick six cherry tomatoes for us to try? - come on, toots! let's get picking! - will you count the tomatoes with us? ok, let's count! one, two, three, four, five, six. - six tomatoes! - great job, you two. now i'll just wash them off so we can taste them. - have you ever tasted a tomato? i wonder what little cherry tomatoes taste like. - here we go. ♪ we gotta try new food 'cause it might taste good ♪
republicans a lot angrier than teams, even though he came into this job as a bush appointee from the republican side. so i think if bernanke is an eight-year chairman, it will be of his soleition, rather than obama saying -- his volition, rather than obama saying it's time for you to go and put in a democrat. >> rose: has he made decisions you disagreed with? >> yes, i disagreed very fundamentally with the lehman brothers decision. it wasn't the cause of the crisis, we had the crisis before, but it was a turning point and everything fell apart. >> rose: what's their answer to that question. >> the answer has changed a few times but the basic answer is we department have the legal means. there was no tarp. there was no dodd-frank. they now have the legal means to handle the next lehman, so to speak, differently. but his view was that they didn't have the legal means to do it. >> the problem with that answer is they dnt have the legal means to do some of the things they actually did do and when they really wanted to to do it they found the legal means so i think that answer from th
on the iranian facilities. started in the bush administration and then was expanded in the obama administration. but the obama administration, like the chinese, has not admitted to having offensive cyber warriors so it's hard to imagine how we're going to have an honest conversation with the chinese about limiting these activities if neither country will even admit to owning weapons. >> rose: how much of the hacking comes from the united states and has nothing to do or is not even in any way monitored by the u.s. government? >> well hard thing to know because it's very difficult to collect statistics in this area. the u.s. government says that unlike the chinese, they do not do any hacking in order to steal corporate secrets. they're not out hacking on behalf of american companies. they only participate in operations that are focused on defending and that include the critical infrastructure. the infrastructure of the united states isn't in government hands it's mowly in private hands with a few exceptions and they're having a hard time doing that. >> rose: are the chinese better at hacking th
covered while the bush administration encouraged embedding and said it wasn't responsible for the safety of those not embedded, some journalists set out on their own to see what they could see without american mel tear supervision or restrictions. >> with iraq, this is what i knew about it before i went for the first time. >> reporter: thorn anderson and kale alford, ameri reed couple who live in texas were among the unembedded photojournalists who covered iraq back then. their san francisco exhibit "eye level in iraq" shows the result of their taking chances as they tried to find iraqis in situations apart from the troops. >> when you talk to an iraqi person and you're surrounded by these giant men with >> when you talk to an iraqi person and you're surrounded by these giant men with, you know, automatic weapons and flak jackets and helmets, they just cannot respond to you in a normal way. you can't sit there and have tea with them; you can't go their funerals, you can't play with their children. the only way to have that experience is to get outside the humvee, to take off the flak jac
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)